This study is the first long-range study of factors involved in dog bite fatalities in nearly 2 decades. The study relied on more than just media reports (as other reports on this have done), and dived deep by looking at police reports, interviewing investigators, etc to analyze the entirety of contribruting factors in these fatal incidents.

According to the report, much of this study was necessary because of the lack of solid data, and misleading data, that exists:

"The undue emphasis on breed has contributed to a lack of appreciation of the ownership and husbandry factors that more directly impact dogs and the complex genetic factors that work in combination with husbandry to influence a dog's behavior and responses to a given set of stimuli."

The report notes that it has been long-recommended that dog bite prevention strategies not be focused on a singlular factor in isolation (such as breed) -- but that strategies focused on multiple key factors of animal husbandry be used.

The results of the study continue to reinforce this position -- with a lot of information about factors involving fatal incident. Let's get to some key points from the study.

The study

The study analyzed 256 dog bite related fatalities from 2000 to 2009. The study again notes that dog bite fatalities are exceptionally rare -- with only an average of 25 per year over the course of the 10 year study in a country with a human population of 300 million and a dog population of about 70 million.

-- Only 7% of victims (17) were the established owners of the dog(s). In only 6% of cases (16) did the owner have a familiar relationship with the dog(s). In 85% of cases, the victim had only an incidental relationship with the dog, or no relationship with the dog.

-- In 143 (56%) of the incidents, the victim was deemed unable to interact appropriately with the dog. In 116 of these cases (81%) it was because they were too young (less than 5). The rest were older individuals, compromised because of drug and alcohol use or suffered from alzheimers, demential or uncontrollable seizure disorder.

-- In 223 (87%) of the cases, there was no able-bodied person close enough to the victim to be able to intervene

-- In 148 (58%) involved a single dogs. Most of the deaths among infants (26 of 30) were attributed to a single dog, whereas over half of the deaths (63 of 96, 66%) involving victims over 15 involved multiple dogs.

-- In 74% of cases, the deaths occurred on the dog owner's property. Only 20% of cases (51, 5 per year) occurred entirely off of the owner's property.

-- of the incidents involving resident dogs, the dogs were usually kept in ways that isolated them from the humans in the family. 38% were chained. 35% were in an isolated fenced area, outdoor pen or isolated indoor area. 15% were allowed to roam free.

-- In 38% of cases, there is evidence that the owner or caretaker had knowledge of either prior dangerous actions by the dog or had previously allowed the dogs to run loose.

-- In 21% of cases, there was evidence of prior abuse or neglect of the dogs

-- Past mismanagement of the dogs was far more prevelent (56%) in cases involving multiple dogs.

-- Very interestingly, co-occurance of multiple variables were present in 81% of cases. This is significant.

The role of breed

The report really struggled with determination of breeds involved in the attacks. While previous (and other) studies have relied solely on media reports, this proved to be problematic.

For single dog incidents, in 22% of cases, media reports actualy conflicted as to the breed of dog involved. In 35% of cases, law enforcement assessment of breed differed from media reports.

For multiple dog incidents, breed descriptors in media reports conflicted in 36% of cases, and law enforcement assessment differed from media reports in 43% of cases.

In 91% of cases, dogs were characterized by at least one media outlet as a single breed descriptor even though more than 50% of US dogs are mixed breed dogs.

Overall, they were only able to accuratedly assign breed status in 45 of the 256 (18%) of the caes. These 45 cases represented 20 recognized dog breeds including 2 dogs of known mixed breed ancestory.

Discussion

From the paper:

"The most striking finding was the co-occurrence of multiple factors potentially under the control of the dog owners: isolation of dogs from positive family interaction and other human contact; mismanagement of dogs by owners; abuse or neglect of dogs by owners, dogs left unsupervised with a child or vulnerable adult who may be unfamiliar to the dog; maintenance of dogs in an enviornment where they are trapped, neglected and isolated and have little control over the environment or choice of behavior. These conditions potentially predispose dogs to enhanced territorial, protective, and defensive behaviors toward stimuli that occur commonly in every day life."

"The most preventable incidents involved very young children left alone with dogs to whom they were unfamiliar or toddlers were allowed to wander off and encounter unfamiliar dogs. In at least 19 fatalities, authorities considered the lack of supervision so negligent that crimminal charges were filed against the parent or caretaker."

The article also goes into some pretty significant discussion about how husbandry practices influence a dog's bahavior:

"Dogs that have not developed a close relationship or bond with humans (ie resident dogs) generally act without relying on input from a human. Topal et al reported that dogs living in homes (in contrast to dogs living outdoors) developed bonds with people and were more dependent on their owners when solving tasks. Appropriate humane and clear interactions with people provide dogs with information about how to interact with humans in ways that are neither scary nor injurous to the dogs or humans.....discouraging maintenance of dogs in isolation from farmily; stressing the importance of a secure, stable, predictable environment and encouraging positive relationships with people may have considerable benefits."

The article is interesting throughout -- with some other interesting notes on ways that may benefit in dog bite prevention.

One unaltered dogs -- the article notes that the majority of dogs involved were unaltered dogs. While research shows that sexually intact male dogs react more intensely, more quickly and for longer periods of time, it also suggests that owner failure to have dogs spayed or neutred may co-occur with other factors that more directly influence a dog's social behavior.

It also notes that most children do not receive any type of dog bite prevention education. This combined with the overall lack of of supervision as a role in dog attack fatalities is especially problematic. It is also worth noting that research suggests that children cannot be expected to show good judgment in their interactions with dogs until they are 6 years of age.

The paper concludes:

"Experts on the subject of dog bite related injuries, including the AVMA Task Force on Canine Aggression and Humane Interaction and the CDC, who have consistently stressed the complex and multiple approaches to address this complexity. The present study findings also support recommendations of the AVMA and Others regarding the inadvisability of single-factor solutions such as BSL, which may actually divert resources from effective measures and regulations."

As noted above, the results from this paper are terribly new. If you have been following this blog and other expert resources for the past 20 years, they have all consistently pointed to responsible husbandry practices as being crucial to the prevention of dog bites in this country. This study however provides a very comprehensive look at these dog bite fatality factors in a statistically reliable form. This study represents the first such reliable study in nearly 20 years. I also goes into far more depth than all previous studies by going deeper than just media reports in its analysis. All previous reports have relied solely on media reports that (as this study has shown) are often unreliable, contradicting, and lack the depth of information needed to make knowledgable husbandry recommendations.

I'm excited for this report, and hope that the information is spread far and wide so that communities will focus on responsible ownership education and practices as a method of dealing with the problem of dog bites vs a singular failed approach of targeting breeds (or looks) of dogs.

April 01, 2013

In 1991, the United Kingdom issued its Dangerous Dogs Act which essentially banned four different breeds of dogs that they, at the time, considered more dangerous than other types of dogs: Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Japanese Tosa and American Pit Bull Terrier.

However, statistics contine to show that the legislation has not only been ineffective in promoting pubic safety, it may also have been counter-productive in its efforts.

According to a recent article in The Guardian, there were roughly 1,150 dog bites that led to hospitalization in 1990 -- the year before the DDA was enacted. By 2012, the number had risen steadily to 6,447 -- a whopping 460% increase in major bites. You can get an interactive chart at the link.

Much of they're problem tends to be directly linked to the ordinance itself.

Last week, a 14 year old UK girl , Jade Anderson, was tragically killed by 4 dogs in a home where she was alone and visiting. By most accounts in the report, the girl was carrying a meat pie that the dogs were interested in, she tried to keep them away from the food and in the commotion, ended up attacked and killed by the dogs.

Based on the reports, there were three different breeds of dogs involved in the attack.

However, instead of focusing on the circumstances that led up to the attack, and caused it (pack mentality, victim potentially not well known to the dogs, the dogs being very large and too numberous and would not have been able to be handled by a young girl, potential food aggression), the authorities seem to be more focused on determining that none of the dogs involved were unlawful breeds.

Because they seem so focused on what type of dog is involved, they are completely missing the causal factors that may be leading up to the attack. And THUS, many residents of the UK are being misled into thinking they are 'safe' because they have dogs that are not of the restricted breeds instead of making appropriate procautions or being aware of warning signs. While most dogs ARE safe, dog owners certainly need to be aware of what warning signs to look for.

But they don't. And for 20 years people have been led down the path of faulty, misleading information, and the ignorance is causing more and more people to be injured.

Dog attacks are not a breed-specific issue, and when it comes to dogs, there are dozens upon dozens of breeds that are large, strong, and capable of causing harm if they are poorly handled or raised, and have beahvioral issues that are left uncorrected -- especially when the largest number of the severe bite victims (nearly 20%) are under the age of 9 and thus, more vulnerable to bites (and less aware of warning signs given by the canine).

The UK breed ban has been a huge failure -- not only failing to protect the public from severe bites, but actually, through focusing on the wrong issues, having the opposite impact that was intended.

July 05, 2011

On Sunday, an 11 month old boy was fatally attacked at a family get-together for the holiday.

According to the most detailed report, the boy, Michael Naglee, was sitting on his grandmother's lap and squirmed to get free. The grandmother put the boy on the floor about 7 feet away from the dog and the dog attacked the child.

The dog was shot at the scene and carried off by law enforcement officials. The dog was initially described as a "135 lbs pit bull" -- which would be unbelievably large for any of the 'pit bull' type breeds. The breed of dog has been changed by law enforcement officials to an American Bulldog. Five of the 7 news sources that have covered the story thus far mis-identified the type of dog initially. They all seem to have adjusted the information (although not all have noted the change).

In this case, as in all cases, breed is not a causal factor in the attack. However, it is a tragedy that further emphasizes the need for care when young children are around dogs -- regardless of the type of dog.

June 14, 2011

That's right. A Golden Retriever. The very same type of dog that is a beloved family dog throughout most of the world.

Like nearly all cases, there is a reason for dog attacking. According to those close to the situation, they said the victim had owned the dog since he was a puppy and he reportedly had kicked and otherwise abused the dog since the dog was a puppy.

In the dog's final act of retaliation, the owner got what was coming to him.

For people who have experience with dogs, this story is not surprising. The breed of dog in this case, and in all cases, is irrelevant to the story. The story is about the dog's abuser who created an aggressive dog that, in a last act of retaliation against his abuser bit, and killed the man.

Cases of serious dog bites tend to have this type of story -- they involve a history of abuse by the owner, a dog that has been perpetually under-socialized, a very young child that doesn't recognize the warning signs given by a dog and continues to approach a cornered dog, a pack of dogs that are roaming with no adult supervision

Behind nearly all of these attacks is human interaction with the dog that led to the tragedy. Unfortunately, it has become common for people like Merrit Clifton and Colleen Lynn to count numbers and completely ignore the circumstances that lead to these attacks.

But what if we could isolate that, say, abused dogs were x% more likely to attack than not abused dogs. That would seem really relevant, yes? And then, what if we determined that certain types of dogs were more likely to be in abusive situations than other dogs? Would we then assume it was the type of dog problem? Or the abusive situation problem?

So, when 'pit bull' type dogs are involved in a disproportionate number of bite incidents (which other than fatality data, there is no real evidence to suggest, but they are over-represented in fatality data), is it because there is something wrong with the dogs? Or is there a people problem behind the attacks?

And the bigger question: if you want to solve the problem, do you track down and kill all of the dogs, or do you work to solve the people problem that has created the situation? (Hint: breed is irrelevant to the situation -- so not dealing with the people issue will cause issues like they have in the UK).

There is no dog problem. With some 78 million dogs in this country, there are very few incidents in which dogs inflict serious injuries on humans. But if you want to solve the problem with these serious injuries, you must solve the problem of the people around the dogs that led to the problem in the first place. Because you can't judge the behavior of the dogs void of information about the people involved in the case.

Because it's the wrong approach. And ineffective. Fortunately most cities are catching on, and major US cities like Cleveland, Toledo, and Topeka have repealed their breed specific laws just in the past 12 months.

This is good news. Not just for the dogs. But for really improving public safety by focusing on the right issues.

Editor's Note: In regards to a comment below I want to be especially clear on something. Even abused dogs are not necessarily LIKELY to show aggression. In reality, most of the abused dogs we've had have been shy and shut down vs aggressive. The point of the post is NOT to say that abused dogs are likely to bite people, only that the series of circumstances surrounding major bites must be considered in order to know WHY it happened. Abuse/Neglect can be among those circumstances. Dogs, to their credit, are very unlikely to lash out in this way -- which is why we have as a society recognized them as animals that we can bring into our homes and make a part of our lives.

July 26, 2010

Not long ago, when a breaking news story hit, there were deadlines. If a reporter got the story done by 5 pm it'd make the 6 pm news. If they got the story in by midnight, it might make the next day's paper. But there was a set cutoff time -- and the reporter had until that deadline to gather as much information as possible before the story was due.

There are no deadlines any more. With the development of the internet, there is no need for deadlines. Every minute is a deadline, because when breaking news hits, the information is now available almost instantly around the internet.

If a news source wants to lead on breaking news, every minute counts - -because being late will hurt the number of page views, and thus, the number of advertising dollars the media outlet gets.

And in the rush to be first, digging for truth and accuracy have taken a back seat.

In the first hour of the 'news' being available, media outlets rushed to be first. The news of "pit bulls' attack man" hit the media and spread quickly. Within an hour, 150 media outlets could lay claim to being on top of breaking news.

Then, in the next 5 days, the majority of the media outlets were no longer interested. Those next 5 days featured information about the events that led up to the attack.

- A dog owner who had an extensive criminal history

- Dogs that had been loose and aggressive only two days earlier, but were left in the home

- Police hauling the dog's owner to jail, leaving the dogs behind to live in the home with no supervision

- A woman who let the dogs out - -even while knowing they were aggressive -- because a plummer needed to get into the apartment

- Acknowledgment that police may or may not have ever called animal control about the dogs -- and even if they had, animal control is running 800 calls behind in their responses so may not have had time' to deal with the issue regardless.

Nope, once that information came out, there was little interest from most media outlets. They were too busy being "first" on something else -- likely with equally shoddy details.

In the California case, the media equally reported only the initial "what" -- but few came back to hit on the "why's" that came out in the subsequent days.

We're all the victims in this -- because the majority of the media outlets hit a few glossy facts and moves on. We get little information that would be valuable in our quest to actually know the circumstances that led to the event.

Circumstances are important -- in fact, they are the most important part of serious dog attacks. Unfortunately, in the race to be 'first', the media often just skips the time needed to get to the why. And as a society, we often become more ignorant as to why dogs bite, and why attacks occur.

This is why we should rely on experts (who understand canine behavior) and not just media reports and people who make irrational recommendations based on them when dealing with issues pertaining to dog bites and how to prevent them.

Because in their race to be first, the media often gets it wrong -- and often without complete information.

And if we want to get it right, we should focus on all of the information that is available -- not on knee jerk reactions based on initial media exploitation in attempts to gain eyeballs.

Meanwhile, for the media, take note. There seems to be a big place of differentiation for those who are more concerned about getting it right vs those who only seek to get there first. The internet has allowed everyone to get there 'first', but few appear to be willing to stick with it and get it right.

January 15, 2010

It has become "cool" for people recently to go through fatal dog attack statistics, pull out breed information, and try to make fatal dog attacks into a breed-specific issue. However, when you look at the report for 25 years ago, you find nearly identical circumstances for the fatal dog attacks as you found in 2009, but with a very different-looking breed list (43% of the fatalities were by German Shepherds or St. Bernards).

The circumstances surrounding the attacks? Unsupervised children playing with dogs, children throwing rocks at dogs, dogs that were left on chains, newborn infants left alone with dogs.

The more we talk about "breed" being a primary driver for major dog attacks, or we can learn from history that while the breeds involved has changed, the circumstances have remained strikingly similar.

January 03, 2009

I really hate to do this post. I think the idea of basing much about public safety on the very few dog bite fatalities is pretty absurd. The number of fatalities is such a statistically insignificant number of the total dog bites out there - and even serious bites - that the data isn't all that valuable. Dog bite fatalities are so rare that it would be almost impossible to create one even if you tried.

I also confess that because I don't do actual on-site research on these cases, and all of my 'research' on this comes from media articles I know that a) it may not be a comprehensive list of fatalities and b) that it comes with the inaccuracies that come from any research done solely based on media articles because the media is often innaccurate.

However, I think it's important to do this list because I think there are a lot of people who make assumptions based on dog bite fatality statistics. Most reliable sources sources don't publish their information regularly (unless Jim Crosby posts his analysis again, which is always far better than mine, and Karen Delise seldom publishes her information -- both have on-site, interview information). Most others want to publish statistics without paying any attention to the circumstances that actually led to the fatal attack. They think you can draw conclusions based on numbers, not events.

It is my hope that when people read this, they will note the circumstances that led to the attacks -- so that more of these tragic attacks can be avoided in the future. I certainly think you'll see some major trends as you read through these. Each link links back to my original coverage of the attack earlier this year -- with one exception -- an attack that had almost no information attached to it that I never covered it assuming that more info would come out about it.

I've also noted the amount of media reporting surrounded most of the attacks (when I remembered to put it in my original posts). I think you'll notice a major difference depending on the breeds involved in the attacks.

Here's the list:

Andrew Stein - 8 months old - Doberman Pincher - the child was being watched by his grandmother and may have startled the dog when he touched his paw.

6 week old child - Jack Russell Terrier -- Louisville, KY the child and the smallish dog were left alone together and at some point, the dog attacked and killed the child.

Kelli Chapman - 24 years old - two pit bulls - Longville, LA - this is a really odd story. Chapman was prone to having seizures, and may or may not have had a seizure at the time of the attack. The Chapman's had also previously had a Narcotics SWAT team invade their home for methamphetamines and other drug items and the Chapman's had a dog killed during that raid. This is a very odd story, and since Kelli was alone at the time of the attack, no true details were ever uncovered.

Two year old boy - Husky Mix- Ft Yukon, AK - The young boy wandered into the neighbor's back yard unsupervised. The attacking dog was among a group of chained dogs that were still eating -- the dog was apparently protecting its food. The boy was fond of dogs and just walked up to them without any thought he could be in danger. Was covered by 1 media outlet.

Julian Slack, - 3 years old - Pit bull - Camp Lejeunne, NC - The boy was staying with a babysitter, and a friend of the babysitter came over with his dog (that was apparently unfamiliar with the boy). The dog became startled by something the boy may have done (read: the child was alone with the dog, and we don't know what happened) and atacked the young boy. Made dozens of news sources, including MSNBC.

Tanner Joshua Monk - 7 - Pit bull - Abilene, TX - The dogs were off-leash and apparently attacked and killed the young boy. No one witnessed the attack . Picked up by over 250 media outlets.

Five year old boy - 2 Pit bulls - Weslaco, TX - The dogs belonged to the boy's uncle (who the boy lived with). The family lived in a tough neighborhood, where there had been several robberies in the neighborhood, and yet, police weren't controlling the situation. The uncle got the two dogs to protect his property, and left them chained up most of the time -- letting them lose only late at night. The dogs became aggressive toward a man and another dog and the young boy went out to check on the dogs and was fatally attacked. Picked up by 140 media outlets including national media outlets like CNN and MSNBC.

Loraine May - 74 years old - Golden Retriever/Lab mix and an Austrailian Shepherd Mix -Titusville, FL - The dogs apparently did not get along very well and were prone to fighting. It is believed that the woman was killed when trying to break up the fight. The story was picke up by 20 news outlets, all in the state of Florida.

Tony Evans Jr - 3 years old - pit bull - Jackson, MS - The dog was purchased by the dog's owner to protect his garage that had been broken into on several occassions. The dog was kept chained to the carport and was strictly used as a guard dog. Even the owner said "Believe me, this was no pet". The young boy was left alone unsupervised after 9 pm that night and wandered up to the dog and was attacked and killed. The attack was picked up by dozens of media outlets including nationally on Fox News.

Addison Sonney - 14 months old - Old English Sheepdog - Millcreek Township, PA - Not a lot of details on this attac -- but the infant was killed by the dog -- and the mother appeared to be present.

Two month old boy - Labrador Retriever - Tulsa, OK - The true perfect storm of a fatal dog attack. The mother was a 17 year old single mother with a history of drug addiction. The dog was left unfed for quite a length of time (possibly for up to 3 days). The child was left alone with the dog while the rest of the family slept in a different part of the house.

Isis Krieger - six years old - pit bull -- Alaska - The dog had previously shown several signs of aggression - killing a neighbor's cat, biting two different family members. The dog had been taken from the family before for aggression, but later returned. The child was with her babysitter when the attack occurred.

Alexis Hennessy - five days old - Husky - Hopatcong, NJ - Not a lot of details on this one either but the child was obviously brand newly added to the home.

Robert Howard - Adult male - pit bull - Detroit - Again, a bit of an odd story that didn't make many headlines. But apparently a stray dog attacked a woman and her dogs. A man came to her aid to break up the fight, and the dog bit the man in the leg, severing one of his major artiries and the man died. The dog was described as a "pit bull" - but was never found by authorities so was identified by only the woman at the scene.

Henry Piotrowski - 90 years old - 2 pit bulls - The dogs had a history of aggression - and 911 had received at least 8 phone calls about the dogs roaming off-leash and being aggressive, but authorities never came out to check on the dogs. Piotrowski was attacked and eventually died from the attack.

83 year old woman - 3 pit bulls - Ville Platte, LA - The dogs were running at large and attacked the woman while she was out picking up cans for recycling.

Cendi Kia Carey - 4 months old - pit bull - Las Vegas, NV - New infant had come into the family and neighbors reported that the dog had become increasingly aggressive toward the child over the past four months. The child was left with the grandmother while the parents were away and the dog attacked. Covered in multiple media outlets across the country, from San Francisco to Illinois and in national media like MSNBC.

Three day old infant - Siberian Husky - Leavittsburg, OH -- the dog went into the child's room and attacked the infant while the parents were in another room.

Katya Todesco - 5 years old - pit bull - Simi Valley, CA - The girls was playing with the dog in the back yard with her 13 year old sister. The child and the dog were not familiar with each other. The child "fell into" the dog and the dog lashed out at the child.

Lokepa Liptak - 2 months old - "mixed breed" - Hawaii - No details on how the attack occurred -- but neighbors report that the dog was aggressive and had lived most of its life confine din a small outdoor kennel.

Chester Jordan - 62 years old - 'pit bulls' - Muncie, IN - Jordan lived in the basement of the family home with three adult dogs and six puppies. The man had dementia, and authorities are concerned about the living conditions of the man. The dogs were called 'pit bulls' by the media, so that's what I went with here -- but the dog in the media pictures did not look like it was one of the 'pit bull' breeds. Coroner's reports indicate that the man had old bite wounds that appeared to be from previous bites by the dogs.

Alexander Adams - 2 years old - "terrier mixes" - Las Vegas, NV - The grandmother fed both dogs and left the room -- meanwhile, the 2 year old wandered up to the feeding dogs. When the grandmother returned, the child was dead.

60 year old man - "Mastiff/pit bull mix, 'pit bull' - Riveside, CA -- not much for details on this story. The man went outside to smoke and the two dogs attacked and killed the man (there were also 9 puppies found at the home). No word on what may have caused the attack. The larger dog is being called a Mastiff/pit bull mix - so again, we'll go with that -- but most likely that was one of the Molossar breeds. The story was picked up by over 270 media outlets -- inlcuding national media like USA Today and Fox News -- and all of them reported the attack as being by two 'pit bulls'. Only the local media made the distinction.

In total, there were 23 fatal dog attacks that were reported in 2008 - -which is a more normal number after having a lot in 2007.

Of the 23 fatal dog attacks:

11 different breeds of dogs represented

15 of the victims were six years of age or younger.

Of the 8 attacks involving victims over the age of 6, all included multiple dogs, and three were by stray/off-leash dogs.

8 of the victims were under 14 months of age -- attacked by a wide array of family dogs that were either left alone with the child or where the dog was not adequately socialized with the infants

--5 of these victims were less than 2 months old.

-- There were six different breeds of dogs involved in these attacks

8 of the victims were between the ages of 2 and 7 -- 3 different breeds of dogs involved

-- In none of the cases were the parents present. In 7 of the 8 cases, there was no adult supervision

-- Two of the incidents involved 2 year olds that walked up to animals while eating -- in one of these cases, the dog was also chained.

-- Two of the cases involved dogs that were gotten with the intent of them being guard dogs -- in both cases, the dogs were either chained, or were usually chained.

-- In two of the cases, the dogs had previously show major signs of aggression previously

-- One case involved two dogs that were left to roam free (this was the oldest of the children that was attacked)

-- 7 of the cases involved adults -- 5 different breeds involved

-- 5 of these victims were over the age of 60, 3 over 70

-- All of these attacks involved more than one dog

-- The two oldest victims (83, 93) were attacked by packs of roaming dogs -- one group had been called into authorities on numerous occassions

-- Two of the cases involved cases where dogs got in fights with other dogs and the human got in the middle of the fight. One was on the street, one was betwen dogs in the same family with a history of aggression toward each other.

-- Two had unusual circumstances, either with a man with dementia and another that possibly involved an epileptic seizure

-- In one case, the cause is unknown.

I would also be neglegent if I didn't mention the correlation between poverty and these fatal attacks. Of the attacks involving adults:

Longville, LA has a poverty rate of 16%, which is above the national poverty level of about 12%. We also know there were drugs previously at this residence, and possibly next door also, so this may not be the best of areas on Longville.

Port Richmond, Staten Island, NY (zip code 10302) has a poverty rate of 18% (and we know that in this case, authorities were non-responsive on multiple occassions to calls about these dogs.

Combine this with the dogs that were "necessary for protection" in Weslaco (poverty rate 31% - -and one of the poorest counties in the country), and Jackson, MS (the zip code has a poverty rate of 13%) along with the Ft Yukon, AK having a poverty rate of 18% -- covering most of the older children. I didn't pull this for the exceptionally young children. So that's virtually every attack happening in a zip code with high levels of poverty (where lower education, higher crime also follow).

If we want to stop fatal dog attacks, here are some helpful tips:

1) Educate parents with very young children on the best ways to introduce the dogs/children into the family and educate parents on the importance of supervising the children with the dogs.

2) Prevent the use of dogs for guarding (and the social reasons people feel it is necessary).

3) Educate people that dogs that show aggression either a) should be euthanized or b) worked with with a trainer to cure the aggression issues

4) Enforce leash laws and vigilently pick up stray/roaming dogs.

5) Prohibit unsupervised tethering of dogs - -ie tethering as the primary form of containment.

6) Deal with the societal problems that plague low-educated, low income neighborhoods - -including educating them on the proper ways of caring for and maintaining canines.

This would have solved all but a couple of the stranger attacks over the past year -- and in most years. When we focus the discussions on "breed", we continue to do ourselves a disservice by not focusing on these primary issues. For everyone's benefit, we must begin to focus on the circumstances of these attacks.

December 20, 2008

The man went outside to have a cigarette and was found tragically killed. The dogs involved in the attack are being described as a 107 pound, unaltered male mastiff/pit bull mix, and a 52 point, unaltered female pit bull.

No reason for the attack has been given. I'm hopeful that more information will come out about in the coming days (and I'll update this thread when more is announced).

There were 9 puppies also found at the home. Reports from neighbors appear to be varied, with some saying that the dogs were always very friendly, and a couple reporting that the larger, male dog, was aggressive -- and had become more so since the other dog had arrived at the home.

It's a sad time for this family -- and I wish them the best as they deal with the tragedy.

What I think is interesting about this tragedy is that I think it has highlighted a journalism problem we're having in this country -- that is quickly getting worse.

Just this week, the jointly operated Detroit daily newspapers announced that due to budget cuts, the newspapers will only do home delivery 3 days a week. That's right. In our country's 11th largest metropolitan area will no longer have daily newspaper delivery. This is a strong signal of the writing that has been on the wall for the newspaper industry for quite some time. Two months ago, the McClatchy Company -- the second largest newspaper ownership company, announced it would lay off 1,150 people. McClatchy's problems have led my local newspaper, the Kansas City Star, to lay off around 75 employees this year.

When newspapers (and this has been the case in TV news also) lay off dozens of reporters -- the ability to cover local news is dramatically reduced; which puts further reliance from wire stories for filler news.

Unfortunately, the AP story has a few errors: That both dogs were 'pit bulls'. Anyone who knows anything at all about dogs knows the 107 lb dog is not a 'pit bull'....and that neither the male nor the female dog had been spayed (this reinforces that reporters know very little about dogs). There was also no mention of the 9 puppies on the property that may or may not have played a role in the attack.

But what everyone will see is that two pit bulls killed a man. In nearly every state in the country, they will read that story. They won't read the follow up that one of the dogs was a Mastiff/pit bull mix (and I'd be stunned if some expert goes in there they don't have a real breed to attach to that dog). Or the events that led up to the man being killed.

And then, someone will wonder, why do I only see attacks by pit bulls on the news?

This is why. I can't remember a single fatality story that has been circulated as widely as this one. Pretty crazy.

November 29, 2008

On Wednesday, right before the holiday weekend, a Las Vegas family met with tragedy as their dog attacked and killed their two year old son.

The child was at home with his grandmother and his newborn infant brother. There were two dogs in the home (both are officially described as 40 lbs terrier mixes), and it remains unclear whether one or both of the dogs were involved in the attack.

The police in Las Vegas seem to offer some pretty solid bits of advice to avoid horrific tragedies like this:

"The kids really want to play with the aimals. The animals are not quite so sure and some times they get a little defensive, especially of their territory," said metro officer Bill Cassell. Cassell also recommended that parents introduce children and dogs slowly. "For awhile, keep the children and the animals separated. Let the dogs gradually get used to the fact the children are in the house."

Cassell also recommended against having children feed the dogs during the holidays.

This is a horrible tragedy -- but one that is completely avoidable. People MUST supervise their dogs around their young children. Fatal attacks are very rare and usually completely avoidable.

November 10, 2008

In Karen Delise's book called "Fatal Dog Attacks", she referes to fatal dog attacks as a "perfect storm". That is the perfect storm of the irresponsible owner, the problem dog, and the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time. And as statistically improbable that a dog will fatally attack someone (.00003% of the nation's 75 million dogs are involved in fatal attacks in a given year) it would be virtually impossible to even create such an incident if someone was really trying.

Such is the case in the tragic fatality in Tulsa, OK this summer. In this case, a three month old Labrador Retreiver puppy killed a two month old infant.

The story is tragic. But the further investigation in the case shows a recipe that was brewing.

The mother of the child was a 17 year old single mother -- who had had a past history with drug addiction. Apparently the dog was found having not been fed in quite some time -- maybe for as long as 3 days prior to the attack. There were no traces of commerical dog food were found in the dog's stomach. The child was left alone in the living room while the rest of the family slept in a different part of the house...and the baby was killed by the hungry dog.

The mother is being charged with 2nd degree manslaughter in the attack.

It was the perfect storm of unfortunate events and family negligence. It's not hard to see how it all happened. And even though the dog is now dead, no one is really thinking the dog is to blame for this.

Meanwhile, just think if the media did this type of follow up on every fatal dog attack. How would our opinions be different of what causes them? Would we start to see the trend in irresponsible dog ownership and a "perfect storm" of bad circumstances? Or would we really still have people clinging to a false idea that 'breeds' are responsible for attacks?

Interestingly, all of the people who seriously study dog attack fatalities have determined that its an ownership issue, including Karen Delise, Marjorie, Jim Crosby and the Center for Disease Control. If only the media would report the circumstances of the attacks in the same way they did for this Lab attack...we'd be a much smart culture.